Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “affordances”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2015

NASA Affordable Vehicle Avionics (AVA): Common Modular Avionics System for Nano-Launchers Offering Affordable Access to Space

Small satellites are becoming ever more capable of performing valuable missions for both government and commercial customers. However, currently these satellites can only be launched affordably as secondary payloads. This makes it difficult for the small satellite mission to launch when needed, to the desired orbit, and with acceptable risk. NASA Ames Research Center has developed and tested a prototype low-cost avionics package for space launch vehicles that provides complete GNC functionality in a package smaller than a tissue box with a mass less than 0.84 kg. AVA takes advantage of commercially available, low-cost, mass-produced, miniaturized sensors, filtering their more noisy inertial data with realtime GPS data. The goal of the Advanced Vehicle Avionics project is to produce and flight-verify a common suite of avionics and software that deliver affordable, capable GNC and telemetry avionics with application to multiple nano-launch vehicles at 1 the cost of current state-of-the-art avionics.

Guidance Navigation and Control↗
NASA NTRS2012

Affordability Approaches for Human Space Exploration

The design and development of historical NASA Programs (Apollo, Shuttle and International Space Station), have been based on pre-agreed missions which included specific pre-defined destinations (e.g., the Moon and low Earth orbit). Due to more constrained budget profiles, and the desire to have a more flexible architecture for Mission capture as it is affordable, NASA is working toward a set of Programs that are capability based, rather than mission and/or destination specific. This means designing for a performance capability that can be applied to a specific human exploration mission/destination later (sometime years later). This approach does support developing systems to flatter budgets over time, however, it also poses the challenge of how to accomplish this effectively while maintaining a trained workforce, extensive manufacturing, test and launch facilities, and ensuring mission success ranging from Low Earth Orbit to asteroid destinations. NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) in support of Exploration Systems Directorate (ESD) in Washington, DC has been developing approaches to track affordability across multiple Programs. The first step is to ensure a common definition of affordability: the discipline to bear cost in meeting a budget with margin over the life of the program. The second step is to infuse responsibility and accountability for affordability into all levels of the implementing organization since affordability is no single person s job; it is everyone s job. The third step is to use existing data to identify common affordability elements organized by configuration (vehicle/facility), cost, schedule, and risk. The fourth step is to analyze and trend this affordability data using an affordability dashboard to provide status, measures, and trends for ESD and Program level of affordability tracking. This paper will provide examples of how regular application of this approach supports affordable and therefore sustainable human space exploration architecture.

Holladay, Jon↗
NASA NTRS2011

Reliability and Maintainability Engineering - A Major Driver for Safety and Affordability

The United States National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is in the midst of an effort to design and build a safe and affordable heavy lift vehicle to go to the moon and beyond. To achieve that, NASA is seeking more innovative and efficient approaches to reduce cost while maintaining an acceptable level of safety and mission success. One area that has the potential to contribute significantly to achieving NASA safety and affordability goals is Reliability and Maintainability (R&M) engineering. Inadequate reliability or failure of critical safety items may directly jeopardize the safety of the user(s) and result in a loss of life. Inadequate reliability of equipment may directly jeopardize mission success. Systems designed to be more reliable (fewer failures) and maintainable (fewer resources needed) can lower the total life cycle cost. The Department of Defense (DOD) and industry experience has shown that optimized and adequate levels of R&M are critical for achieving a high level of safety and mission success, and low sustainment cost. Also, lessons learned from the Space Shuttle program clearly demonstrated the importance of R&M engineering in designing and operating safe and affordable launch systems. The Challenger and Columbia accidents are examples of the severe impact of design unreliability and process induced failures on system safety and mission success. These accidents demonstrated the criticality of reliability engineering in understanding component failure mechanisms and integrated system failures across the system elements interfaces. Experience from the shuttle program also shows that insufficient Reliability, Maintainability, and Supportability (RMS) engineering analyses upfront in the design phase can significantly increase the sustainment cost and, thereby, the total life cycle cost. Emphasis on RMS during the design phase is critical for identifying the design features and characteristics needed for time efficient processing, improved operational availability, and optimized maintenance and logistic support infrastructure. This paper discusses the role of R&M in a program acquisition phase and the potential impact of R&M on safety, mission success, operational availability, and affordability. This includes discussion of the R&M elements that need to be addressed and the R&M analyses that need to be performed in order to support a safe and affordable system design. The paper also provides some lessons learned from the Space Shuttle program on the impact of R&M on safety and affordability.

Safie, Fayssal M.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Affordable Exploration of Mars: Recommendations from a Community Workshop

There is a growing opinion that within two decades initial human missions to Mars are affordable under plausible budget scenarios, with sustained international participation, and --- especially --- without requiring those first missions to achieve a burdensome number of goals. In response to this view, a group of experts from the Mars exploration stakeholder communities attended the "Affording Mars" workshop at George Washington University in December 2013. Participants reviewed scenarios for proposed affordable and sustainable human and robotic exploration of Mars, the role of the International Space Station as the essential early step toward humans to Mars, possible "bridge" or "transition" missions in the 2020s, key capabilities required for affordable initial missions, international partnerships, and usable definitions of affordability and sustainability. We report here the findings, observations, and recommendations that were agreed to at that workshop. In the context of affordable early missions to Mars, we also discuss the recent report of the National Research Council on human space flight and a pair of recent scenarios that appear to promise reduced costs.

Perform an analysis elaborating↗
DOE OSTI2022

A comparison of building system parameters between affordable and market-rate housing in New York City

Low-income households in the United States experience higher than average energy burdens (defined as the proportion of household income spent on energy utilities), and many of these households struggle to simultaneously pay for rent, energy, and basic household necessities. The analysis presented here in this study examines whether the underlying characteristics of buildings and their energy systems could contribute to this disparity for affordable housing residents in New York City. It combines an energy audit dataset of 7,328 multifamily buildings with a database of properties receiving local, state, or federal housing subsidies. The results of this analysis indicate that the building-level installed equipment in large (greater than 50,000 square feet) affordable housing buildings in New York City is more efficient than that in market-rate buildings, but this trend largely disappears when considering overall building characteristics, such as location, size, or age. Significant differences in the types of systems installed in affordable and market-rate housing are also observed, as well as the types of energy efficiency recommendations made by energy auditors. However, these latter data were not normalized by building system characteristics, as that analysis is much more difficult to interpret for categorical data such as heating system type. These findings indicate that retrofit policies and building performance standards focused on affordable housing will likely need to account for underlying differences in building characteristics between affordable and market-rate housing to achieve intended impacts.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Household Transportation Energy Affordability by Region and Socioeconomic Factors

Transportation fuel is an important component of household budgets, as 3.3% of total household expenditures are for vehicle fuel nationwide and over 50% of annual household expenditures on energy are for transportation. These average values vary geographically, and higher energy cost burdens are faced by households with lower incomes. Defining transportation energy affordability burden as the percentage of annual household income spent on vehicle fuel, this study aims to quantify affordability as a function of household characteristics and geography. Here, through analysis at the census tract level, this study (i) projects annual household vehicle miles traveled (VMT) based on demographic factors using machine-learning techniques, (ii) estimates local differences in vehicle fuel economy and fuel price, and (iii) quantifies resulting transportation energy affordability by census tract. This study found that the average burden by tract varies from 0.15% to 8%. The variation in affordability can be largely explained by income level and vehicle fuel efficiency. Suburban and rural households spend more on transportation energy compared with urban households because of the usage of less fuel-efficient vehicle technologies and higher annual VMT. Lower-income groups have a wide distribution of the percentage of income spent on transportation energy, 1.2% to 8%, whereas the range for the highest income group ($125,000+) is from 0.15% to 3.9%. This detailed transportation energy affordability analysis provides a better understanding of regional variations in household travel behavior, helps to determine where fuel-efficient vehicle technologies are more likely to be used, and improves estimates of vehicle ownership costs.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
NASA NTRS2010

Affordability Engineering: Bridging the Gap Between Design and Cost

Affordability is a commonly used term that takes on numerous meanings depending on the context used. Within conceptual design of complex systems, the term generally implies comparisons between expected costs and expected resources. This characterization is largely correct, but does not convey the many nuances and considerations that are frequently misunderstood and underappreciated. In the most fundamental sense, affordability and cost directly relate to engineering and programmatic decisions made throughout development programs. Systems engineering texts point out that there is a temporal aspect to this relationship, for decisions made earlier in a program dictate design implications much more so than those made during latter phases. This paper explores affordability engineering and its many sub-disciplines by discussing how it can be considered an additional engineering discipline to be balanced throughout the systems engineering and systems analysis processes. Example methods of multidisciplinary design analysis with affordability as a key driver will be discussed, as will example methods of data visualization, probabilistic analysis, and other ways of relating design decisions to affordability results.

Reeves, J. D.↗
NASA NTRS2012

An Affordability Comparison Tool (ACT) for Space Transportation

NASA bas recently emphasized the importance of affordability for Commercial Crew Development Program (CCDP), Space Launch Systems (SLS) and Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV). System architects and designers are challenged to come up with architectures and designs that do not bust the budget. This paper describes the Affordability Comparison Tool (ACT) analyzes different systems or architecture configurations for affordability that allows for a comparison of: total life cycle cost; annual recurring costs, affordability figures-of-merit, such as cost per pound, cost per seat, and cost per flight, as well as productivity measures, such as payload throughput. Although ACT is not a deterministic model, the paper develops algorithms and parametric factors that use characteristics of the architectures or systems being compared to produce important system outcomes (figures-of-merit). Example applications of outcome figures-of-merit are also documented to provide the designer with information on the relative affordability and productivity of different space transportation applications.

McCleskey, C. M.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Affordable Exploration of Mars: Recommendations from a Community Workshop on Sustainable Initial Human Missions

There is a growing consensus that within two decades initial human missions to Mars are affordable under plausible budget assumptions and with sustained international participation. In response to this idea, a distinguished group of experts from the Mars exploration stakeholder communities attended the "Affording Mars" workshop at George Washington University in December, 2013. Participants reviewed and discussed scenarios for affordable and sustainable human and robotic exploration of Mars, the role of the International Space Station over the coming decade as the essential early step toward humans to Mars, possible "bridge" missions in the 2020s, key capabilities required for affordable initial missions, international partnerships, and a usable definition of affordability and sustainability. We report here the findings, observations, and recommendations that were agreed to at that workshop.

Community↗
NASA NTRS2015

The Affordance Template ROS Package for Robot Task Programming

This paper introduces the Affordance Template ROS package for quickly programming, adjusting, and executing robot applications in the ROS RViz environment. This package extends the capabilities of RViz interactive markers by allowing an operator to specify multiple end-effector waypoint locations and grasp poses in object-centric coordinate frames and to adjust these waypoints in order to meet the run-time demands of the task (specifically, object scale and location). The Affordance Template package stores task specifications in a robot-agnostic XML description format such that it is trivial to apply a template to a new robot. As such, the Affordance Template package provides a robot-generic ROS tool appropriate for building semi-autonomous, manipulation-based applications. Affordance Templates were developed by the NASA-JSC DARPA Robotics Challenge (DRC) team and have since successfully been deployed on multiple platforms including the NASA Valkyrie and Robonaut 2 humanoids, the University of Texas Dreamer robot and the Willow Garage PR2. In this paper, the specification and implementation of the affordance template package is introduced and demonstrated through examples for wheel (valve) turning, pick-and-place, and drill grasping, evincing its utility and flexibility for a wide variety of robot applications.

Hart, Stephen↗
NASA NTRS2015

Affordable Development and Demonstration of a Small NTR Engine and Stage: A Preliminary NASA, DOE, and Industry Assessment

The Nuclear Thermal Rocket (NTR) represents the next evolutionary step in cryogenic liquid rocket engines. Deriving its energy from fission of uranium-235 atoms contained within fuel elements that comprise the engine's reactor core, the NTR can generate high thrust at a specific impulse of approx. 900 seconds or more - twice that of today's best chemical rockets. In FY'11, as part of the AISP project, NASA proposed a Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) effort that envisioned two key activities - "Foundational Technology Development" followed by system-level "Technology Demonstrations". Five near-term NTP activities identified for Foundational Technology Development became the basis for the NCPS project started in FY'12 and funded by NASA's AES program. During Phase 1 (FY'12-14), the NCPS project was focused on (1) Recapturing fuel processing techniques and fabricating partial length "heritage" fuel elements for the two candidate fuel forms identified by NASA and the DOE - NERVA graphite "composite" and the uranium dioxide (UO2) in tungsten "cermet". The Phase 1 effort also included: (2) Engine Conceptual Design; (3) Mission Analysis and Requirements Definition; (4) Identification of Affordable Options for Ground Testing; and (5) Formulation of an Affordable and Sustainable NTP Development Strategy. During FY'14, a preliminary plan for DDT&E was outlined by GRC, the DOE and industry for NASA HQ that involved significant system-level demonstration projects that included GTD tests at the NNSS, followed by a FTD mission. To reduce development costs, the GTD and FTD tests use a small, low thrust (approx. 7.5 or 16.5 klbf) engine. Both engines use graphite composite fuel and a "common" fuel element design that is scalable to higher thrust (approx. 25 klbf) engines by increasing the number of elements in a larger diameter core that can produce greater thermal power output. To keep the FTD mission cost down, a simple "1-burn" lunar flyby mission was considered along with maximizing the use of existing and flight proven liquid rocket and stage hardware (e.g., from the RL10-B2 engine and Delta Cryogenic Second Stage) to further ensure affordability. This paper provides a preliminary NASA, DOE and industry assessment of what is required - the key DDT&E activities, development options, and the associated schedule - to affordably build, ground test and fly a small NTR engine and stage within a 10-year timeframe.

Nuclear rocket engines↗
NASA NTRS2015

Affordable Development and Demonstration of a Small NTR Engine and Stage: How Small is Big Enough?

The Nuclear Thermal Rocket (NTR) derives its energy from fission of uranium-235 atoms contained within fuel elements that comprise the engine's reactor core. It generates high thrust and has a specific impulse potential of approximately 900 seconds - a 100% increase over today's best chemical rockets. The Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) project, funded by NASA's AES program, includes five key task activities: (1) Recapture, demonstration, and validation of heritage graphite composite (GC) fuel (selected as the "Lead Fuel" option); (2) Engine Conceptual Design; (3) Operating Requirements Definition; (4) Identification of Affordable Options for Ground Testing; and (5) Formulation of an Affordable Development Strategy. During FY'14, a preliminary DDT&E plan and schedule for NTP development was outlined by GRC, DOE and industry that involved significant system-level demonstration projects that included GTD tests at the NNSS, followed by a FTD mission. To reduce cost for the GTD tests and FTD mission, small NTR engines, in either the 7.5 or 16.5 klbf thrust class, were considered. Both engine options used GC fuel and a "common" fuel element (FE) design. The small approximately 7.5 klbf "criticality-limited" engine produces approximately 157 megawatts of thermal power (MWt) and its core is configured with parallel rows of hexagonal-shaped FEs and tie tubes (TTs) with a FE to TT ratio of approximately 1:1. The larger approximately 16.5 klbf Small Nuclear Rocket Engine (SNRE), developed by LANL at the end of the Rover program, produces approximately 367 MWt and has a FE to TT ratio of approximately 2:1. Although both engines use a common 35 inch (approximately 89 cm) long FE, the SNRE's larger diameter core contains approximately 300 more FEs needed to produce an additional 210 MWt of power. To reduce the cost of the FTD mission, a simple "1-burn" lunar flyby mission was considered to reduce the LH2 propellant loading, the stage size and complexity. Use of existing and flight proven liquid rocket and stage hardware (e.g., from the RL10B-2 engine and Delta Cryogenic Second Stage) was also maximized to further aid affordability. This paper examines the pros and cons of using these two small engine options, including their potential to support future human exploration missions to the Moon, near Earth asteroids, and Mars, and recommends a preferred size. It also provides a preliminary assessment of the key activities, development options, and schedule required to affordably build, ground test and fly a small NTR engine and stage within a 10-year timeframe.

Spacecraft design↗
NASA NTRS2016

Affordable Development and Demonstration of a Small Nuclear Thermal Rocket (NTR) Engine and Stage: How Small Is Big Enough?

The Nuclear Thermal Rocket (NTR) derives its energy from fission of uranium-235 atoms contained within fuel elements that comprise the engine's reactor core. It generates high thrust and has a specific impulse potential of approximately 900 specific impulse - a 100 percent increase over today's best chemical rockets. The Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) project, funded by NASA's Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) program, includes five key task activities: (1) Recapture, demonstration, and validation of heritage graphite composite (GC) fuel (selected as the Lead Fuel option); (2) Engine Conceptual Design; (3) Operating Requirements Definition; (4) Identification of Affordable Options for Ground Testing; and (5) Formulation of an Affordable Development Strategy. During fiscal year (FY) 2014, a preliminary Design Development Test and Evaluation (DDT&E) plan and schedule for NTP development was outlined by the NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC), Department of Energy (DOE) and industry that involved significant system-level demonstration projects that included Ground Technology Demonstration (GTD) tests at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS), followed by a Flight Technology Demonstration (FTD) mission. To reduce cost for the GTD tests and FTD mission, small NTR engines, in either the 7.5 or 16.5 kilopound-force thrust class, were considered. Both engine options used GC fuel and a common fuel element (FE) design. The small approximately 7.5 kilopound-force criticality-limited engine produces approximately157 thermal megawatts and its core is configured with parallel rows of hexagonal-shaped FEs and tie tubes (TTs) with a FE to TT ratio of approximately 1:1. The larger approximately 16.5 kilopound-force Small Nuclear Rocket Engine (SNRE), developed by Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) at the end of the Rover program, produces approximately 367 thermal megawatts and has a FE to TT ratio of approximately 2:1. Although both engines use a common 35-inch (approximately 89-centimeters) -long FE, the SNRE's larger diameter core contains approximately 300 more FEs needed to produce an additional 210 thermal megawatts of power. To reduce the cost of the FTD mission, a simple one-burn lunar flyby mission was considered to reduce the liquid hydrogen (LH2) propellant loading, the stage size and complexity. Use of existing and flight proven liquid rocket and stage hardware (e.g., from the RL10B-2 engine and Delta Cryogenic Second Stage) was also maximized to further aid affordability. This paper examines the pros and cons of using these two small engine options, including their potential to support future human exploration missions to the Moon, near Earth asteroids (NEA), and Mars, and recommends a preferred size. It also provides a preliminary assessment of the key activities, development options, and schedule required to affordably build, ground test and fly a small NTR engine and stage within a 10-year timeframe.

Spacecraft design↗
NASA NTRS2017

NASA Affordable Vehicle Avionics (AVA)

Small satellites are becoming ever more capable of performing valuable missions for both government and commercial customers. However, currently these satellites can be launched affordably only as secondary payloads. This makes it difficult for the small satellite mission to launch when needed, to the desired orbit, and with acceptable risk. What is needed is a class of low-cost launchers, so that launch costs to low-Earth orbit (LEO) are commensurate with payload costs. Several private and government-sponsored launch vehicle developers are working toward just that-the ability to affordably insert small payloads into LEO. But until now, cost of the complex avionics remained disproportionately high. AVA (Affordable Vehicle Avionics) solves this problem. Significant contributors to the cost of launching nanosatellites to orbit are the avionics and software systems that steer and control the launch vehicles, sequence stage separation, deploy payloads, and telemeter data. The high costs of these guidance, navigation and control (GNC) avionics systems are due in part to the current practice of developing unique, single-use hardware and software for each launch. High-performance, high-reliability inertial sensors components with heritage from legacy launchers also contribute to costs-but can low-cost commercial inertial sensors work just as well? NASA Ames Research Center has developed and tested a prototype low-cost avionics package for space launch vehicles that provides complete GNC functionality in a package smaller than a tissue box (100 millimeters by 120 millimeters by 69 millimeters; 4 inches by 4.7 inches by 2.7 inches), with a mass of less than 0.84 kilogram (2 pounds. AVA takes advantage of commercially available, low-cost, mass-produced, miniaturized sensors, filtering their more noisy inertial data with real-time GPS (Global Positioning Satellite) data. The goal of the AVA project is to produce and light-verify a common suite of avionics and software that deliver affordable, capable GNC and telemetry avionics with application to multiple nanolaunch vehicles at 1 percent of the cost of current state-of-the-art avionics.

space technology↗